Yang Hu of Lu wished to attack the Three Huan. Failing, he fled to Qi, and Duke Jing treated him with ceremony. Bao Wenzi remonstrated, saying, “This must not be done. Yang Hu enjoyed favor from the Ji house, yet he wished to attack Ji Sun, because he coveted his wealth. Now Your Majesty is wealthier than Ji Sun, and Qi is greater than Lu; Yang Hu will exhaust all his deceit here.” Duke Jing therefore imprisoned Yang Hu.
Someone says: In a house worth a thousand gold, the son may still be unkind, for men’s desire for profit is intense. Duke Huan was foremost among the Five Hegemons, yet he struggled for the state and killed his elder brother, because the profit was great. Between ruler and minister there is not the closeness of brothers. If seizing and killing the ruler can bring success, then one may control a state of ten thousand chariots and enjoy great profit. In that case, which of the ministers would not have the heart of Yang Hu? Affairs succeed through secrecy and skill, and fail through carelessness and clumsiness. That the ministers have not yet raised trouble is only because their preparations are incomplete. If all ministers have the heart of Yang Hu and the ruler does not know it, that is subtle and skillful. Yang Hu, greedy for the world, sought to attack his superior; that is coarse and clumsy. If Duke Jing is not made to punish this clumsy Yang Hu, then Bao Wenzi’s argument turns against itself. The loyalty or deceit of ministers depends on the ruler’s conduct. If the ruler is enlightened and strict, the ministers will be loyal; if he is weak and dim, they will be deceitful. To know the subtle is called enlightenment; to grant no rescue or pardon is called strictness. Not to recognize Qi’s subtle ministers, yet to punish Lu’s already failed rebel, is this not absurd?
Someone else says: The benevolent and the greedy do not share the same heart. Thus Prince Muyi of Song declined the lordship, while Shang Chen of Chu murdered his father. Quji of Zheng yielded to his younger brother, while Duke Huan of Lu killed his elder brother. The Five Hegemons annexed one another’s states; if one judges all men by Duke Huan’s conduct, then no one can be considered steadfast and incorruptible. Moreover, if the ruler is enlightened and strict, the ministers will be loyal. Yang Hu raised rebellion in Lu; failing, he fled. If he enters Qi and is not punished, this sustains rebellion. An enlightened ruler will punish him, knowing that Yang Hu may be used to aid disorder; this is the insight that perceives the subtle. It is said, “Feudal lords regard the state as their kin.” If the ruler is strict, Yang Hu’s crime must not be let pass; this is the reality of granting no pardon. Thus punishing Yang Hu is precisely what makes ministers loyal. To fail to know Qi’s subtle ministers, yet to abandon punishment for manifest rebellion, to demand security from what has not yet occurred, and not to punish a clear crime, is indeed absurd. Now, by punishing the rebel who fled from Lu, the ruler awes ministers who harbor treacherous hearts, and may also win the favor of the Ji, Meng, and Shusun houses. How can Bao Wenzi’s argument be regarded as correct?
Note
This Han Feizi ‑ Chapter 39.2 presents two successive rebuttals over imprisoning fugitive rebel Yang Hu. It debates whether punishing known rebels deters hidden treachery, examining ministerial loyalty, human greed and royal deterrent statecraft.
Yang Hu:
Also known as Yang Huo, a powerful retainer of the Ji house in Lu. He tried to overthrow the ruling families but failed and fled to Qi.
The Three Huan:
The three powerful clans of Lu – Ji, Meng, and Shusun – descended from Duke Huan of Lu. They long dominated Lu’s politics.
Duke Jing of Qi:
A ruler of Qi during the late Spring and Autumn period. Confucius once served at his court.
Bao Wenzi:
A minister of Qi. He warns that Yang Hu is dangerous because he covets wealth and will use deceit.
Duke Huan of Qi:
Duke Huan of Qi was the most celebrated of the Five Hegemons. Han Fei’s critic recalls that even he once killed his elder brother to seize power, showing how strong profit can be.
Five Hegemons:
A traditional label for leading rulers who claimed leadership over other states during the Spring and Autumn period.
Prince Muyi of Song:
A figure associated with the state of Song, remembered for refusing or yielding the lordship.
Shang Chen of Chu:
Later King Mu of Chu. He is said to have killed his father to take the throne.
Quji of Zheng:
A Zheng noble who is presented here as yielding authority to his younger brother.
Duke Huan of Lu:
A ruler of Lu who is said to have killed his elder brother, Duke Yin, in a succession struggle.
Legalist debate:
The passage turns on whether a ruler should punish an obvious rebel. One voice says punishing only clumsy rebels is useless if subtle treachery remains. The other says visible crimes must be punished to deter ministers and maintain order.
二
鲁阳虎欲攻三桓，不克而奔齐，景公礼之。鲍文子谏曰：“不可。阳虎有宠于季氏而欲伐于季孙，贪其富也。今君富于季孙，而齐大于鲁，阳虎所以尽诈也。景公乃囚阳虎。
或曰：千金之家，其子不仁，人之急利甚也。桓公，五伯之上也，争国而杀其兄，其利大也。臣主之间，非兄弟之亲也。劫杀之功，制万乘而享大利，则群臣孰非阳虎也？事以微巧成，以疏拙败。群臣之未起难也，其备未具也。群臣皆有阳虎之心，而君上不知，是微而巧也。阳虎贪于天下，以欲攻上，是疏而拙也。不使景公加诛于拙虎，是鲍文子之说反也。臣之忠诈，在君所行也。君明而严，则群臣忠；君懦而暗，则群臣诈。知微之谓明，无救赦之谓严。不知齐之巧臣而诛鲁之成乱，不亦妄乎？
或曰：仁贪不同心。故公子目夷辞宋，而楚商臣弑父；郑去疾予弟，而鲁桓弑兄。五伯兼并，而以桓律人，则是皆无贞廉也。且君明而严，则群臣忠。阳虎为乱于鲁，不成而走，入齐而不诛，是承为乱也。君明则诛，知阳虎之可济乱也，此见微之情也。语曰：“诸侯以国为亲。”君严则阳虎之罪不可失，此无救赦之实也，则诛阳虎，所以使群臣忠也。未知齐之巧臣而废明乱之罚，责于未然而不诛昭昭之罪，此则妄矣。今诛鲁之罪乱以威群臣之有奸心者，而可以得季、孟、叔孙之亲，鲍文之说，何以为反？
Leave a Reply